Blog Image

Alan Dransfield's Blog

Freedom of Information and Health and Safety

This blog is aimed at shaming those who ignore health and safety and those who abuse the Freedom of Information Act out of laziness, corruption or to cover up incompetence.

Reason for the failing school?

PFI Schools Posted on Mon, May 19, 2014 19:45:34

From: Alan Dransfield
Date: Sun, May 18, 2014 at
10:14 PM
Subject: Ofsted-Report-23-24-October-2013.pdf
To: Ben BRADSHAW
Cc: Richard Bailey, Mark Thorogood Dear Mr Bradshaw

Please see the OFSTED report for St Peters School Exeter
dated Oct 2013 , which is scathing report of incompetence and neglect by the
Teachers and Local Education Authority.

The fact that St Peter schools has not had any potable
drinking water for the past 7/8Years
– could this be the root cause of the education failure at this school? Poor bloody kids have been dehydrated for
nearly a decade.

I call upon my MP to take this matter up with Michael Gove,
who has the audacity to call himself Minister of Education.

Dransfield

http://www.st-peters-exeter.devon.sch.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Ofsted-Report-23-24-October-2013.pdf



FoI Office of Nuclear Regulation

Lightning Protection Posted on Mon, May 19, 2014 19:40:54

Office for Nuclear Regulation
Building 4 Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle
L20 7HS

Attn the FOIA Department

Dear Sir

Under protection of the FOIA 2000 please provide me with a copy of the ONR Risk Assessment for Lightning at all the UK Active Nuclear Premises both civil and MOD.

No doubt there will be a generic template document for Lightning Risk Assessment (LRA) and this document will suffice my FOIA request.

To assist your researchers, the LRA should be in accordance with BS/EN 62305/2008.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield



Nuclear Industry (don’t worry)

Lightning Protection Posted on Mon, May 19, 2014 19:36:37

Attn Sue Johns.
ONR

HSE Executive Director

Dear Madam

As I feared ,the
Risk Assessment for Lightning in the British Nuclear Industry has not taken
lightning dangers seriously because of antiquated death rates of 1 in 10
million deaths caused by lighting.

The public safety
related to lighting strike to individuals persons is a secondary matter. My
primary concerns are for the premises safety caused by a pursuing fire caused
by lightning.

I am sure you will
agree that fires and nuclear premises should be at the top of your safety lists.

This document from
the ONR proves to me that they have been grossly negligent ref the UK nuclear premises nationwide and I call
upon my MP to take this matter up with the oversight authorities and MOD
immediately.

I also fear that some
UK nuclear sites have been subjected to the
lightning protection scams, which involves the installation of lightning
protection systems which are scams, similar to that of the bomb detector
which was a golf ball detector last year.

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield
http://www.onr.org.UK/tolerability.pdf



Health and Safety failures – who cares about the kids?

Devon County Council Posted on Mon, May 19, 2014 19:30:07

Email sent – 19 May 2014 17:28

Dear Mr Bradshaw

As you are aware,
I have made several complaints to you about the H&S failures at this
location and couple of my complaints have been addressed ie the ECO drains at
the top of the steps in the first courtyard and the lightning protection danger
of the gate nearest the Basin.

There are still a
number of H&S issues that have not been addressed and I urge my MP to write
to the College and the DCC seeking assurances this climbing centre is fit for
purpose.

I am of the
opinion it is not safe and should be subjected to a full H&S audit. Three
biggest dangers on this site currently are:

1. The Gas
installation is non-compliant.

2. The Lightning
Protection System is non-compliant.

3. The hand rail
safety rails ( inner side) are non-compliant.

All 4 issues carry
life threatening ramifications to the end user of this facility.

My offer to meet
you and the management team to discuss these issues remains open.

In the event of a
serious injury or death at this location, it is highly probable the public liability
insurance would be revoked. If my allegations are correct, to which I hold no
doubt whatsoever, it raises the question of why this facility was accepted by
the local planning authority.

With thanks

Yours
sincerely

Alan
Dransfield